Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:02:47.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Consumers, curations, ‘community’, contestation and the time of COVID-19. Linkages and perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2022

Saro Wallace
Saro Wallace*
Affiliation:
Research Fellow, Gerda Henkel Stiftung Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reification of ‘community’ and community engagement by professional curators of material culture has recently been critiqued in ways which highlight the diversity of cultural identities and priorities among the general public. When not acting as coherent local communities under professional supervision, people are otherwise curating culture in public space within frameworks of spiritual and creative expression, place significance and identity. Employing primarily secondary sources, I address recent outdoor public curation practices in the West, and consider such deposits in relation to cultural-heritage management, a perspective in which they have hitherto been little addressed. Although these practices typically use accumulations of themed objects to achieve visibility and audience, I conclude that they are ultimately more focused on the individual than on the community, with linkages within and between them highly digitally enabled. Apparently intensified by the effects of recent COVID-19 travel lockdowns, the practices are also linked by their typical colonization of transit spaces (thereby accessing audiences who are also expected participants), by their conscious ephemerality (with deliberate innocence about end destinations of the objects used), and by their use of mundane consumer artefacts. All these features pose challenges to their management, and curated deposits are often contested or removed by official curators or managers of public space, even as the same entities appropriate similar tropes to engage customers. With resurgent interest in tangible culture and physical place following pandemic-era overloading in the virtual domain, with travel habits potentially using different routes, at altered times, and with use of social media continuing to grow, such activities may see increased participation. This analysis suggests that imaginative proactive official treatment of these curations (e.g. by municipal authorities, heritage site curators, rangers or other property owners/managers) could avoid conflict with creators and also help reduce enduring public ‘innocence’ about the disposability of consumer objects. Treatment could involve encouraging ongoing adaptation (digitally recorded and disseminated) of the curated objects in situ by their transitory public audiences.

Keywords

Public curationsconsumerismlockdown culturecultural heritage managementwastetransit spacesdigital heritage
Type
Articles
Information
Archaeological Dialogues , Volume 29 , Issue 1 , June 2022 , pp. 89 - 107
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Balthazar, A.C., 2016: Old things with character. The fetishization of objects in Margate, UK, Journal of material culture 21(4), 448–64.10.1177/1359183516662676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkham, P., 2018 Stone-stacking. Cool for Instagram, cruel for the environment, The guardian, 17 August 2018, at www.theguardian.com (accessed 12 June 2020).Google Scholar
BBC News, 2015: Dumfries ‘yarn bombs’ are litter, says D and G council, BBC News, 20 February 2015, at www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 26 May 2020).Google Scholar
BBC News, 2018a: Beach images across the UK honour World War One soldiers, BBC News, 11 November 2018, at www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 15 May 2020).Google Scholar
BBC News, 2018b: Remembrance Sunday 2018. Poppy displays in pictures, BBC News, 10 November 2018, at www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 15 May 2020).Google Scholar
BBC News, 2018c: Row over ‘fairy doors’ removed from Pembrokeshire wood, BBC News, 13 August 2018, at www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 24 May 2020).Google Scholar
BBC News, 2020a: Coronavirus lockdown. Whitley Bay pebble stacks transform beach, BBC News, 20 April 2020, at www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 17 May 2020).Google Scholar
BBC News, 2020b: How coronavirus restrictions have changed UK beaches, BBC News, 5 May 2020, at www.bbc.co.uk (accessed 14 May 2020).Google Scholar
Berger, S., Dicks, B. and Fontaine, M., 2020: Community. A useful concept in heritage studies?, IJHS 26(4), 325–51.Google Scholar
Belazel, M., 2006: The ‘fairy door’ phenomenon, The guardian, 23 June 2006, at www.theguardian.com (accessed 20 June 2020).Google Scholar
Belia, V., Buikema, R., Schavemaker, M., Sitiza, E. and Wevers, R., 2019: Towards a museum of mutuality. Editorial, Stedelijk studies 8, 1–9.Google Scholar
Blain, J., and Wallis, R.J., 2008: Sacred, secular, or sacrilegious? Prehistoric sites, pagans and the Sacred Sites project in Britain, in J. Schachter and S. Brockman (eds), (Im)permanence. Cultures in/out of time, Pittsburgh, 212–23.Google Scholar
Böhlin, A., 2020: ‘It will keep circulating’. Loving and letting go of things in Swedish second-hand markets, Worldwide waste. Journal of interdisciplinary studies, e-ISSN 2399-7117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonacchi, C., and Moshenska, G., 2015: Critical reflections on digital public archaeology, Internet archaeology 40, 1–13.Google Scholar
Borraz, S., 2019: Love and locks. Consumers making pilgrimages and performing love rituals, in D. Bajde, D. Kjeldgaard and R.W. Belk (eds), Consumer culture theory, Bingley, 7–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J., n.d: Twitter.com/JamesGABrown.Google Scholar
DeSilvey, C., 2017: Curated decay. Heritage beyond saving. Minneapolis.Google Scholar
Desilvey, C., and Harrison, R., 2020: Anticipating loss. Rethinking endangerment in heritage futures, IJHS 26(1), 1–7.Google Scholar
Draus, P., Haase, D., Napieralski, J., Qureshi, S. and Roddy, J., 2020: Lurking in the bushes. Informality, illicit activity and transitional green space in Berlin and Detroit. Cultural geographies 28(2), 319–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elyse, 2017: The four copper beech trees, inspiration for Tolkien’s Ents, 28 March 20107, at www.thetreeconversations.com.Google Scholar
Enli, G.S., 2009: Mass communication tapping into participatory culture. Exploring Strictly come dancing and Britain’s got talent , European journal of communication 24(4), 481–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fredheim, L.H., 2018: Endangerment-driven heritage volunteering. Democratisation or ‘changeless change’, IJHS 24(6), 619–33.Google Scholar
Greenhalgh, S., 2008: Our lady of flowers. The ambiguous politics of Diana’s floral revolution, in A. Kear and D.L. Steinberg (eds), Mourning Diana. Nation, culture and the performance of grief, New York, 40–59.Google Scholar
Hahner, L.A., and Varda, S. J., 2014: Yarn bombing and the aesthetics of exceptionalism, Communication and critical/cultural studies 11, 301–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, S., 2018: Heritage protection for street art? The case of Banksy’s Spybooth, Nuart journal 1(1), 31–35.Google Scholar
Hanson, B.H., 1993: The Peter Pan chronicles. The nearly 100-year history of ‘the boy who wouldn’t grow up’, New York.Google Scholar
Henley Standard, 2017: Wish upon a sycamore and make your dreams come true, Henley Standard, 28 September 2017, at www.henleystandard.co.uk (accessed 29 May 2020).Google Scholar
Herring, N., 2019: Fairy door trail at Trap Grounds nature reserve, Oxford. Oxford mail, 6 August 2019, at oxfordmail.co.uk (accessed 10 September 2020).Google Scholar
Herzfeld, M., and de Cesari, C., 2015: Urban heritage and social movements, in L. Meskell (ed.), Global heritage. A reader, Chichester, 171–95.Google Scholar
Historic England, 2020: historicengland.org.uk/images-books/archive/collections/photographs/picturing-lockdown.Google Scholar
Houlbrook, C., 2014: Coining the coin-tree. Contextualising a contemporary British custom, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Manchester.Google Scholar
Houlbrook, C., 2017: Lessons from love-locks. The archaeology of the contemporary assemblage, Journal of material culture 23, 214–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlbrook, C., 2018: The magic of coin-trees from religion to recreation, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlbrook, C., 2021a: Unlocking the love-lock. The history and heritage of a contemporary custom, Oxford.Google Scholar
Houlbrook, C., 2021b: www.play-observatory.com/blog/filling-time-and-having-fun-the-material-culture-of-childrens-lockdown-deposits (accessed November 2021).Google Scholar
Insoll, T., 2011: Introduction. Ritual and religion in archaeological perspective, in T. Insoll (ed.), The Oxford handbook of the archaeology of ritual and religion, Oxford, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, M., 2015: J.R.R. Tolkien’s trees, 23 September 2015, at www.travelherstory.com.Google Scholar
Kahn, E.M., 2012: Antiques on camera and behind every door, New York times, 26 January 2012, at nytimes.com (accessed 15 August 2020).Google Scholar
Kost, H., 2019: The Grinch who stole Christmas ornaments from a public park, CBC News website, at www.cbc.ca3, 13 December 2019 (accessed May 2020).Google Scholar
Kozinets, R., 2015: Netnography. Redefined. London.Google Scholar
Lane, R., and Watson, M., 2012: Stewardship of things: The radical potential of product stewardship for re-framing responsibilities and relationships to products and materials, Geoforum 43(6), 1254–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovatt, M.J., 2015: Charity shops and the imagined futures of objects. How second-hand markets influence disposal decisions when emptying a parent’s house, Culture unbound 7, 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lunt, P., 2009: Television, public participation, and public service. From value consensus to the politics of identity, AAPSS 625, 128–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lusher, A., 2015: The Somerset village that’s having to put a stop to more than 100 fairy doors appearing in the woods, The independent, 4 March 2015, at www.independent.co.uk (accessed 12 June 2020).Google Scholar
McNeill, L., 2007: Portable places: Serial collaboration and the creation of a new sense of place , Western folklore 66(3–4), 281–99.Google Scholar
Margry, P.J., 2008: Shrines and pilgrimage in the modern world. New itineraries into the sacred, Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marianthi, K. 2006: The folk cult of St Phanourios in Greece and Cyprus, and its relationship with the international tale type 804, Folklore 117(1), 54–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merrill, S., 2015: Keeping it real? Subcultural graffiti, street art, heritage and authenticity, IJHS 21(4), 369–89.Google Scholar
Millie, A., 2019: Crimes of the senses: Yarn bombing and aesthetic criminology , British journal of criminology 59(6), 1269–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moccia, F., 2006: Ho voglia di te, Milan.Google Scholar
Neave, R., 2014: Memories of Goddess pilgrimage with Carol Christ, at www.womentravelblog.com/spirituality-of-travel/goddess-pilgrimage-2/#more-5482 (accessed 21 May 2020).Google Scholar
Neave, R., 2015: Finding the sacred. Goddess pilgrimage in Crete, at womentravelblog.com/destinations/europe/greece/goddess-pilgrimage-in-crete (accessed 24 May 2020).Google Scholar
Newell, V., 1967: Some notes on the egg-tree, Folklore 78, 29–45.Google Scholar
Orange, H., and Graves-Brown, P., 2019: ‘My death waits there among the flowers’: popular music shrines in London as memory and remembrance, in E. Koskinen-Kolvisto, H. Orange, S. De Nardi and S. Haigh (eds), The Routledge handbook of memory and place, London, 345–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
PA Media, 2021: Banksy’s ‘escape’ mural on former Reading prison is defaced, The guardian, 16 March 2021, at www.theguardian.com (accessed 22 June 2020).Google Scholar
Renfrew, C., 2003: Figuring it out. What are we? Where do we come from? The parallel visions of artists and archaeologists, London.Google Scholar
Rico, T., 2016: Constructing destruction. Heritage narratives in the tsunami city, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roster, C.A., 2001: Letting go. Process and meaning of dispossession in the lives of consumers, Advances in consumer research 28, 425–30.Google Scholar
Rountree, K., 2001: The past is a foreigners’ country. Goddess feminists, archaeologists, and the appropriation of prehistory, Journal of contemporary religion 16, 5–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rountree, K., 2007: Archaeologists and Goddess feminists at Çatalhöyük. An experiment in multivocality, Journal of feminist studies in religion 23(2), 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santino, J., 2004: Performance commemoratives, the personal, and the public. Spontaneous shrines, emergent ritual, and the field of folklore, Journal of American folklore 117(466), 363–72.Google Scholar
Sayej, N., 2020: The coronavirus museum. How historians are documenting the pandemic, The guardian, 22 April 2020, at www.theguardian.com (accessed 1 July 2020).Google Scholar
Schorch., P., and McCarthy, C. (eds), 2018: Curatopia. Museums and the future of curatorship, Manchester.Google Scholar
Senies, H.F., 2006: Mourning in protest. Spontaneous memorials and the sacralization of public space, in J. Santino (ed.), Spontaneous shrines and the public memorialization of death, New York, 41–56.Google Scholar
Shepherd, J., 2019: Shoe trees in Michigan and the rumours that surround them, MLive, at www.mlive.com/travel/2017/11/shoe_trees_michigan.html (accessed November 2021).Google Scholar
Simon, N., 2010: The participatory museum, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Smith, L., 2009: Class, heritage and the negotiation of place, unpublished paper presented at the Missing Out conference, English Heritage, at www.anu-au.academia.edu/LaurajaneSmith.Google Scholar
Stallabrass, J., 2006: High art lite. The rise and fall of young British art, London.Google Scholar
Staples, T.A., 2000: The Cottingley fairies, in J. Zipes (ed.), The Oxford companion to fairy tales, Oxford, 109–10.Google Scholar
Taylor, B.L., 2015: Reconsidering digital surrogates. Toward a viewer-oriented model of the gallery experience, in S. Dudley (ed.), Museum materialities. Objects, engagements, interpretations, London, 175–84.Google Scholar
Taylor, J., and Gibson, L.K., 2016: Digitisation, digital interaction and social media. Embedded barriers to democratic heritage, IJHS 23(5), 408–20.Google Scholar
Teske, R.T. 1985: Votive offerings and the belief system of Greek-Philadelphians, Western folklore 44(3), 208–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solent, That’s TV, 2016: Fairy doors capturing the imagination in Southampton, 13 February 2016, at www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzh-6CWxDYE.Google Scholar
Thurgill, J., 2016: Enchanted geographies. Experiences of place in contemporary British landscape mysticism, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Royal Holloway University of London.Google Scholar
Tulley, C., 2018: The artifice of Daidalos. Modern Minoica as religious focus in contemporary paganism, International journal for the study of new religions 8(2), 183–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vikan, G., 1994: Graceland as locus sanctus, in G. DePaoli (ed.), Elvis + Marilyn. 2X immortal, New York, 150–70.Google Scholar
Vivienne, S., and Burgess, J., 2013: The remediation of the personal photograph and the politics of self-representation in digital storytelling, Journal of material culture 18(3), 279–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waight, E., 2015: Buying for baby. How middle-class mothers negotiate risk with second-hand goods, in E. Casey and Y. Taylor (eds), Intimacies, critical consumption and diverse economies, London, 197–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waterton, E., 2015: Heritage and community engagement, in T. Ireland and J. Schofield (eds), The ethics of cultural heritage, New York, 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whistlecraft, B., 2017: Offerings at sacred sites. Tradition or trash?, 28 September 2017, at www.mooredgeinthemist.com.Google Scholar
Wollan, M., 2011: Graffiti’s cozy, feminine side, New York times, May 18 2011, at www.nytimes.com (accessed 14 August 2020).Google Scholar
Wright, J., 2007: Who’s behind the fairy doors?, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar